|
So I'm super excited to start playing now that I have some time for other games (over my factorio addiction after 200 hours in 4 weeks). I had a couple questions, I'll be playing regardless though: Is this the type of game that allows deep empire building? Someone mentioned the average length of games is somewhere around 3-4 hours? That doesn't seem like much time to build up giant stuff but I don't actually know. Is it more fast-paced or can you play it at a slow pace and turtle a little bit while figuring stuff out? Played and loved SR1, and I enjoyed how you could spend a lot of endgame time building bigger and bigger things, and you weren't really forced into any outcome.
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
Well the game never forces you to end. You'll get the victory sum-up screen, but then you can keep going. Additionally if you put the AI on easy I don't think they will ever attack you first. As far as pacing, you can slow the game down to half speed, or increase it to 10x speed. You can also generate multiple galaxies of hundreds/thousands of systems, and then there is a good chance you'll never even run across a single AI for a long time. Finally I think you can start a game in an empty universe if you want. Oh and there is a galaxy type that is endlessly expanding where you fight bigger and bigger remnant ships to conquer more and more planets which is fun to mess around on. ate shit on live tv fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Apr 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
Garfu posted:So I'm super excited to start playing now that I have some time for other games (over my factorio addiction after 200 hours in 4 weeks). I had a couple questions, I'll be playing regardless though: Is this the type of game that allows deep empire building? Someone mentioned the average length of games is somewhere around 3-4 hours? That doesn't seem like much time to build up giant stuff but I don't actually know. Is it more fast-paced or can you play it at a slow pace and turtle a little bit while figuring stuff out? Played and loved SR1, and I enjoyed how you could spend a lot of endgame time building bigger and bigger things, and you weren't really forced into any outcome. Why and where you build as an Empire is going to be majorly influenced by your Lifetype. The First and Nylli for instance are very turtle-y Empires, for instance, and the Feyh favor 'waves' of expansion, and the Heralds are constantly and uncontrollably expanding at all times possible. The Mono have a slow start but their mid-game can get crazy due to instant teleportation-colonization. They have to build their own population though, so it can get hairy. So on and so forth. The options to go deep are there, though, of course. Building Ringworlds, Star Forges, strapping Planetary Engines on to your worlds and moving them about and so on are all in-scope of that 3-4 hours; you're just not liable to have access to all those big techs at the same time. More constant forces on the scale of deep empire building are things like generating new planets and star systems, naming and developing worlds, building up the Moons in your Empire, getting your mining bases going, and so on. Your FTL type will also encourage or discourage fast play. Gates for instance favors a more calculated and insular Empire. If you want a slower experience, I'd recommend playing in the Expanse maptype with 2x default spacing and other species such as the Terrakin and the Feyh - making sure to tick on their AI "Passive" option so everybody starts off peaceful to each other and stay that way until you interrupt it. Firgof fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Apr 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
Firgof posted:Why and where you build as an Empire is going to be majorly influenced by your Lifetype. The First and Nylli for instance are very turtle-y Empires, for instance, and the Feyh favor 'waves' of expansion, and the Heralds are constantly and uncontrollably expanding at all times possible. The Mono contrarily have a slow start but their mid-game can get crazy due to instant teleportation-colonization. They have to build their own population though, so it can get hairy at times. The options are there, though, of course. Building Ringworlds, Star Forges, strapping Planetary Engines on to your worlds and moving them about and so on are all in-scope of that 3-4 hours; you're just not liable to have access to all those big techs at the same time. The fact that I have to manually purchase pop as the Mono for every planet is probably one of the few things that is super frustrating and tedious about the game. Especially once the empire gets large enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:The fact that I have to manually purchase pop as the Mono for every planet is probably one of the few things that is super frustrating and tedious about the game. Especially once the empire gets large enough. You can of course tick the Toggle Repeat Queue on that so that you're always building more population - but that can cost a significant amount of money and labor that you might've not otherwise wanted to spend. Not perfect, but you can at least account for it if you just make a mental note of how much your big forge planets are spending each cycle on building pop. Mono are one of the harder/more fiddly races to play though, yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:The fact that I have to manually purchase pop as the Mono for every planet is probably one of the few things that is super frustrating and tedious about the game. Especially once the empire gets large enough. Yea. I like the idea of the Mono, but the population management makes them a mid-game nightmare. Additionally early on they start out so slow that I don't think they are viable at any difficulty above normal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Firgof posted:Sure. What do your two computers have in common with each other that mine lacks? It makes a noise which I'm guessing is some kind of SR2-specific error report, but since the screen's blacked out, can't do much with that. Do you know off-hand how many times I would have to press tab and then enter to get the report window to close? Same AV as ever, Avast!, only change I can think of is that I bought the DLC yesterday night. Maybe there's been some kind of silent Windows update that's hosed things up?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
On that note I've had a few crashes while playing SR2, I'm running Win10, some of them are abrupt, like SR2 has encountered an error and needs to close, and some times I get the "display driver not responding" error, which causes SR2 to crash.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
 The game seems to be having trouble loading up images when I open it. Sometimes it fixes itself if I leave it for long enough (like, several minutes), like really terrible bizarre popin, sometimes it just stays like that forever. The only other fix I've found is to reinstall, but I'm on my third reinstall now and it's just done it again after being fine for a day or two.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
The white squares are textures that haven't finished loading yet; rather than force people to wait at a "Loading..." screen, we let them interact with the game while textures are still being loaded. If it's taking several minutes to load them in, I'd recommend running a defragment on your harddrive unless it's a SSD. Are there any errors in your console?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
It's probably just my laptop being janky poo poo. I've not had the same problems in other stuff, but if it's actually just where things are loading than I'll just try and fix my poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
Lorini posted:Thanks, that I can answer Try disabling your AV. As an aside, anti-virus software besides windows defender is useless.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2016 23:09
|
|
.
|
I have noticed that the game behaves a lot nicer in windowed mode then in fullscreen mode, so that might fix some people's alt tab woes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
Hot tip: build a few small flagships that are basically just supply storage with engines on and use them to capture planets instead of having your multimillion dollar combat fleets fart around for ages capturing a planet and then going back to get more supplies because they used them all capturing planets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 09:23
|
|
|
lazorexplosion posted:Hot tip: build a few small flagships that are basically just supply storage with engines on and use them to capture planets instead of having your multimillion dollar combat fleets fart around for ages capturing a planet and then going back to get more supplies because they used them all capturing planets. I think if you give them the planetary batteries for weapons it increases capture speed as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
How many research stations should I be building? I normally only build a handful near the start, but then my research seems pitifully slow by midgame. Would it be a bad idea to build a couple on basically every planet with free pressure cap?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Spoggerific posted:How many research stations should I be building? I normally only build a handful near the start, but then my research seems pitifully slow by midgame. Would it be a bad idea to build a couple on basically every planet with free pressure cap? I'd say minimize the number you build on non-crystalline worlds. You should use research resources for your research needs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Star Ruler 2: In the Wake of the Herald posted:Certain types of resources can be sent back to your home galaxy by exporting them to one of your Beacons. The pressures from those resources will then slowly build up Support points on your beacon, and you can spend this Support on a number of useful benefits for your beacons and empire Playing as the Heralds and I appear to be missing something. How and what do I export via beacon? I'd really like to upgrade my beacons and get more of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 05:52
|
|
|
Fire Storm posted:Playing as the Heralds and I appear to be missing something. How and what do I export via beacon? I'd really like to upgrade my beacons and get more of them. You just export a planet's resource to the beacon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 05:57
|
|
|
Fire Storm posted:Playing as the Heralds and I appear to be missing something. How and what do I export via beacon? I'd really like to upgrade my beacons and get more of them. If you hover over the different projects you can see they require ore, defense support, tech support, or power support. Those are generated by a resource which produces that pressure type except for ore. You transfer it over to the gate by either dragging and dropping it from the planet producing it, or click on the planet, and right click on the gate and it should give you the option to export to the gate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 06:00
|
|
|
I've got a saved game where I am mopping up the Oko and when into a system, they have like 30 scouts and a fling beacon and suddenly my support ships in my carrier fleet get flung out of the system and then the game locks. It's interesting to say the least. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Byvh0ybv6TQaUW5lY25jcHZNSUk There's the Save Game. And the autosave, since for some reason I can't open the save game... https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Byvh0ybv6TQaRFdURDRsd2RocGs The system in question is Vik, the Oko are Orange.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Not sure if it's a bug but picking the moon base bonus for your homeworld doesn't give it the pop boost, would be a nice early game booster I think and possibly justify the pick cost a bit more?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Lorini posted:Thanks, that I can answer Quick thing: NOD32 Anti-Virus 9 has been out since October 2015. You may want to upgrade your AV.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
I am playing a 4-player game in a 70-system Rings galaxy. The Heralds were vassalized to the First, and the Hoonan seem to be reigning supreme whilst I war with them on and off. Right now I am trying to match the Hoonan's 2000+ size flagship, and I now have the option to build a Colossus hull ship for the first time. However, there seems to be no advantage over the Titan hull, I have two 3072-size ships, one Titan, one Colossus, and the Colossus is more expensive in up-front costs and upkeep. In fact, I made a third Titan design that tried to copy my 3072 Colossus as closely as possible, and aside from some minor advantages like a second decent-sized Torpedo tube and some extra extra bridges, the Titan version was considerably cheaper for most of the same stats. What is the point of the Colossus? Fun bug (?): Your Overlord will support your efforts to diplomatically annex their systems. I also think the "Increases Power Generation by 25%" research did nothing. I had a power-heavy Graviton Condensor starkiller designed before I got that research, and a redesigned version after was not any different. KlavoHunter fucked around with this message at 06:41 on May 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
Can I ask a dumb ship design question? When shots hit armor, this nullifies or reduces damage on components behind it right? So given your ships are going to be facing the enemy isn't it way more beneficial to have almost all your armour on the front? I understand it adds generic "health" too but doesn't this reduce the damage to critical systems the most?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 09:24
|
|
|
Gammymajams posted:Can I ask a dumb ship design question? When shots hit armor, this nullifies or reduces damage on components behind it right? It's not perfect in terms of damage mitigation, but in essence yes, you want to stick armor on the part of your ships most likely to be taking hits. This is also why if you browse Community designs you'll see a trend of ships whose engines are at the front and weapons at the rear - in combat it's more important they can keep firing than keep moving, so the engines can serve as a kind of last-ditch armor belt that keeps your weaponry safe for awhile longer.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
Gammymajams posted:Can I ask a dumb ship design question? When shots hit armor, this nullifies or reduces damage on components behind it right? Since most engines only fire in one direction, your ships probably aren't going to face the direction fire is coming from all the time when they're dodging though. Front armor is good, but you'll take damage from other directions (especially at the start of the fight when your ships are turned around to slow down).
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
What are people's opinions on Torpedo vs Missiles vs Rockets? Originally I thought Torpedo's would be good for punching through armor, but it looks like Torpedo's big thing is AoE damage which is great because the long range of them allows you to shoot about twice before even getting into engagement range, and even in late game fleet's I see the two torpedo hits knock off a few thousand fleet strength, usually I'll put torpedo's on opposing sides of the ship so that they will hit different targets and maximize their AoE. Seems to work well. For my fleets I'm pretty heavy on missile boats as the artillery role, I'll have a similar amount of Beam Ships as the cannon role. Then I redesign my gunships to be raiders, and the heavy gunships to be a shield role with Muon Cannons and a laser. Not sure how effective the shield role is, but it seems good.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
KlavoHunter posted:I am playing a 4-player game in a 70-system Rings galaxy. The Heralds were vassalized to the First, and the Hoonan seem to be reigning supreme whilst I war with them on and off. Yea looks like the colossus doesn't get any discounts unlike a titan does. From the gamefiles: Titan code:code:
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Gammymajams posted:Can I ask a dumb ship design question? When shots hit armor, this nullifies or reduces damage on components behind it right? Armor nullifies damage to hexes behind it (a hex has to be destroyed before a hex behind it can start taking damage). Most armor types also have a Damage Reduction value, meaning that hits they take have a flat # of their total damage reduced on impact - this can make larger designs with armor difficult to damage with smaller guns/ships. A destroyed armor hex provides no benefits, but having armor facing the location you're most likely to be taking hits from is good, yes.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
I watched this whole video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKP6s_8-xTU and it explained ship designs and armor and all of that pretty well.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
Garfu posted:I watched this whole video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKP6s_8-xTU Just remember that damage travels in an arbitrary straight line, and not just following the hexes sides.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
Garfu posted:I watched this whole video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKP6s_8-xTU This video is great. It let me design a small armorless missile support that basically owns much more expensive stuff. I've tried making a beam support at the same size to beat it, but I can't get it to live with the missile support at all. It's disappointing, since unarmored ships should be beam weapon's speciality. It seems like the missile's extreme range, their damage pattern and lumpy damage are way too much for beams that have to slowly grind through a ship tile by tile.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
Missiles are the best for damage, but they can be outrun, cost more supply then lasers and aren't nearly as good vs lots of smaller craft as they will tend to "overkill." That said I make about 1/3 to 1/2 of my support fleet missile boats.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
So I watched that video and thought I knew what I was doing. But I've just spent 2 hours in the design sandbox and I cant' figure out why the top design (the default one) absolutely destroys the bottom design (one I've created): I've watch each ship closely and it seems like the systems on my design stay up long enough but in a 80v80 fight my new ship loses with 59 of the default ships till remaining, despite having more health and more DPS. Garfu fucked around with this message at 04:17 on May 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
Garfu posted:So I watched that video and thought I knew what I was doing. But I've just spent 2 hours in the design sandbox and I cant' figure out why the top design (the default one) absolutely destroys the bottom design (one I've created): Location of the tube maybe. Second or two of extra time it takes the bottom design to hit the top might just do it.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
Yeah before your post I moved the tube to a hex that allowed it to point forward and now it wins.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
If you shoot missiles backwards and sideways, they have to defeat their own momentum before they can start flying in the direction they are supposed to in order to hit the enemy. They have limited fuel so are liable to run dry on the way, too.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
I'm really looking forward to Stellaris but goddamned this still has the best diplomacy aspect of any 4x game.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
How? The card system is cool, but the actual diplomacy ai largely consists of "has more military strength than me -> declare war y/n." If anything I feel like it's the games biggest weakness.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 06:37
|
|
